Nate Silver - 1; Karl Rove - 0

It has been fun listening to the talking heads at Fox complain about the polls the last few weeks, and especially about the New York Times' Nate Silver who analyzes the polls brutally to put them through the sniff test. The refrain, repeated again and again, was that the 2012 electorate was not going to look like the 2008 electorate. Guess what? It looked exactly like it and the keys to Obama's victory are all demographic keys.

Still, there was something especially pathetic about Rove's attempts to rebut his own Fox network when they called Ohio for Obama. No, he insisted, it was too close to call, even though the lion's share of the outstanding votes were in Cuyahoga County, not exactly Romney's stronghold in the Buckeye State. I suppose Rove just wanted to put off for as long as possible the task that stares him in the face now: Trying to convince all those billionaires that if they just keep writing big checks to his SuperPAC, next time he will get it right. Pathetic.  

A final thought before naptime. (Running on 3 and 1/2 hours' sleep here.) Linda McMahon has spent about $50 million in the past two election cycles trying to buy a Senate seat in Connecticut. She was trounced both times. My only regret is that she did not spend $60 million.  

Join the Conversation

Send your thoughts and reactions to Letters to the Editor. Learn more here